About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
aliens now. there have been promises of a u.s. visit program, an entry exit system to track everyone entering into the country to make sure they exit in time. that was first promised back in 1986, ten years later, 1996, congress passed another act to require a fully integrated entry-exit system and full implementation by 2005. guess what, madam president, 2005 has come and gone, it's been 30 years since that initial promise was made. we still don't have an operational effective u.s. visit system. madam president, my colleague from alabama mentioned another glaring example, the fence, the secure fence act. in 2006 we actually passed it in legislation. the secure fence act of 2006 promised to achieve operational control of the entire border. operational control the entire border. and it defind operational control. quote, "the prevention of unlawful entries into the united states including entries by terrorists, unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics and other droon band" -- close quote. well, we clearly haven't achieved that. in fact, we're so far from that goal, d.h.s. h
american and u.s. air in the really raleigh market? >> we -- the overlap, i think is just on the washington, d.c., flight. american serves the hubs for raleigh we serve our hubs from there. i think the overlap is limited to the one flight. >> all right. and i noticed -- and the prices on american and u.s. airways are virtually the same flying out of raleigh occur ram to d.c. how much overlap do you have in charlotte. >> virtually zero. we have a very large connecting hub in charlotte. >> all right. i believe u.s. air serves d.c. out of charlotte, i think they are probably the carrier that has the most flights out of charlotte to d.c. what years years would you anticipate the price difference is from raleigh to d.c. and charlotte to d.c. is? >> i don't know. it sounds like you might know. [laughter] >> it costas lot more money to fly from charlotte to d.c. than raleigh to washington. that's concerning. it's very concerning. and you're direct competitors in a route from raleigh to washington where as u.s. airways it doesn't have a direct competitor, so it costs more money. that would certainl
certainly regards israel as a true and natural u.s. ally." in another quote, he said, "i know hagel personally. i think he believes in the relationship and the natural partnership between israel and the united states." here is an israeli patriot who has spent a great deal of time devoted to the relationship with the united states of israel who understand, in his words, and concludes that chuck hagel regards israel as a true and natural u.s. ally and will act accordingly. he is a dedicated patriot. he is an individual who has served this country in so many different ways and i support his nomination, urge my colleagues to do the same. i think, too, it's important to state that this nomination, as we've done with every secretary of defense for decades, deserves an up-or-down vote on the floor of the united states senate. people may choose to cast a vote against him for many reasons. that's the prerogative of a senator. but i strongly believe that if we want to stay true to the traditions of this body and to the presumption that the president should be at least allowed to have his nomi
's number-one priority will be taking care of our troops. he is a veterans' advocate with the u.s.o. and he's won the respect and admiration of veterans' groups, in addition he's won the support of an extraordinary array of former secretaries of defense, ambassadors and diplomats, senior retired military leaders and in particular, two former members of this body who appeared with him at his testimony, former senators warren and nunn. i believe that chuck hagel is the right man for the challenges, the fiscal challenges that will confront the department of defense. put aside sequester, which i dearly hope will not happen, secretary panetta said it would be irresponsible for the congress to allow it to happen. many of us agree, it must be avoided. but apart from that challenge in the next month, or series of months, the long-term outlook for the department of defense is that it must do more with less, and secretary hagel, if he is confirmed, will have that management task, and he is one of the people in this country who is almost uniquely qualified to carry it out. and i believe that he will w
's with 93% of employers not using the program. outdated examples of e-verify errors. a u.s. citizen in tennessee actually receive an error notice from her employer. she went to the social security administration office to fix it. she thinks she fixes it at social security, but e-verify generates another error and she gets fired. another example, a u.s. citizen experienced an error because an employer made a simple mistake when they were typing the employee's social security number into the system. again, that worker went to a social security office, couldn't resolve the error there, e-verify generated a final nonconfirmation and the worker got fired. the most disturbing piece of all this is that for workers who lose their jobs because of an e-verify error, there's no formal process in place for them to get the jobs back and that's a problem for thousands of workers who experience these errors because you can imagine, these problems are only going to grow exponentially if we mandate the program. given these concerns, we have recommendations for how to move forward. first, congress ne
've heard recently that among developed nations the u.s. has fallen to the bottom as far as longevity is concerned. yet we're paying a lot more than other people. wouldn't it save substantial medicare costs if we veered away from the pill for every ill, that mindset that we've kind of adopted in this country and embrace, look at other measures such as prevention, alternatives and educating people on things like genetically-modified foods and the long-term dangers they can present? >> i don't know who wants to take this. this is, i mean, questions often come up about improving coverage of prevention sort of over the course of a lifetime and in medicare. um, and there's been a lot of in that, and there have been a lot of improvements lately. one of the sort of unfortunate realities of living in this town and working with the congressional budge office as a score -- budget office as a scorekeeper is sometimes those initiatives, people believe they will save money, the cbo scores an increase in spending depending on the preventive service because they don't have a lifetime view, or they m
in the united states but policies here in the u.s. contrast sharply to international counterparts. for example, homosexuals are not restricted from membership in canada or even most european associations. even the u.s. girl scouts have a different policy, accepting gay and transgender members into their associations. the boy scouts of america have almost three million members and 70% of the troops are sponsored by church groups, who oppose homosexuality. in 2000 the u.s. supreme court ruled the group has a constitutional right to refuse gay members. it's a policy many parents want upheld. >> it is not hate. it is not bigotry. it is choice how to raise my children in what i perceive to be my christian values. >> on sunday president obama weighed in urging the group to open its membership to everyone. he agrees. >> the boy scouts are unwilling to lift the ban they simply won't be relevant to a generation that decided to embrace lbgt brothers sisters, coworkers neighbors, friends. >> for now the ban remains in place. scout leaders say they need more time to consider and consult before deciding to
's nominee to be u.s. representative to the united nations. now some presidents include that position in their cabinet. some do not. but astpraoeud that singular insurance -- aside from that sing latin incident which i pointous was the democrats saying they're going to filibuster a nominee by the president and deny him a seat, so far as i've been able to tell there's not been ever an instant in the history of the senate where republicans have used a filibuster to deny a cabinet member an up-or-down vote when nominated by a president. that only leaves appellate judge nominations, circuit judge nominees. up until 2003, so far as i've been able to find, the rule of the senate was that the president's nominees to be on the federal courts of appeal always received an up-or-down vote. they were decided by a vote of 51. then our friends on the democratic side when president bush became president decided they didn't like that, and they changed the practice. they began to filibuster president bush's judges for up or down -- to deny them their seats. i had just arrived in the senate in 2003, mr
. their record -- lousy, persistent, double-digit unemployment and negative economic growth. the u.s. unemployment rate of 7.9% which is actually even higher than my home state is for sure too high, but it is far better than the rate of 26% unemployment in spain and greece, the record of 16% unemployment in portugal. our 2.3% growth rate may seem inadequate and it is, but as we recover from the deepest recession we've seen since the great depression, it is much better than the negative growth rates in the countries that took the austerity path. the results are clear -- the evidence is in from the austerity experiments. the countries that cut the deepest have hurt the most. if we want to continue growing our economy and creating jobs, we need to resist the european path that is championed by republican austerity advocates. we need to maintain the balanced approach that has brought the u.s. economy up out of recession. admittedly not fast enough, but look at what the alternative has been. leader reid's bill would replace the indiscriminate cuts of the so-called sequester with targeted
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9